Jeremy Hunt criticises the publication timing of the OBR’s review, suggesting political bias.
- The review discusses claims of a £22 billion fiscal gap under previous leadership.
- Rachel Reeves highlights a lack of transparency from the former administration.
- OBR Chairman defends timing, citing institutional focus.
- Debates on fiscal transparency and political impartiality escalate.
Jeremy Hunt has voiced concerns regarding the timing of the Office for Budget Responsibility’s (OBR) review, suggesting that it coincides unfavourably with the Autumn Budget release. Hunt claims the publication, which presents criticisms of the opposition party, compromises political impartiality. According to Hunt, no Conservative ministers were consulted, leading him to label the review as a “political intervention.”
The review is set to address Chancellor Rachel Reeves’s allegations of a £22 billion fiscal gap, attributed to the previous government. Reeves accuses the former administration of withholding key financial data, which only became apparent after her assumption of office. The review will focus on departmental spending transparency and data provision to the OBR, aiming to shed light on the alleged fiscal discrepancies.
OBR Chairman Richard Hughes has defended the timing, stressing that the report centres on the institutional relationship between the OBR and Treasury, not partisan issues. Hughes further clarified that the potential market sensitivity of the content did not necessitate sharing conclusions with past ministers before its publication.
As the release aligns with Reeves’s expected budget announcements, it amplifies ongoing debates about governmental transparency and the watchdog’s independence in ensuring fiscal accountability. This scenario may increase pressure on the Conservative Party regarding both government openness and the autonomy of independent fiscal bodies.
The timing of the OBR’s review continues to spark discussions on fiscal transparency and political impartiality.
